Regardless of the level of discomfort you have with the choices a woman makes about her body, it doesn't give you the right to take that choice away from someone else without their permission. Hopefully that is clear.
Classic diversion tactic. Make it personal instead of just discussing the issue.
Oh please, tell me from what exactly I'm diverging. You are a man: you will never, nor could ever, carry a child. Therefore, it is fucked up as shit for you to even "imagine" what a woman might feel about the situation. If that's making it personal, than so be it.
I don't think the private sector was built to handle adoptions on the mass scale that we truly need. I think it has to be a partnership. I would like to see massive tax incentives towards families that adopt American children. The largest hindrance to adoption is the financial cost of doing so. I would have probably seriously considered it at this point without the financial burden. It is a huge cost.
So if in 150 years science has progressed to the point where viability occurs at conception, you think states should be permitted to completely prohibit abortion?
No you don't. If you did, you'd be in favor of prohibiting abortion.
And it's okay for you to tell him he can't even imagine because you have a vagina?
The former is subsumed within the latter. If you avoid something at all costs then you permit it in no circumstances. If you permit it in some instances, you are talking about avoidance at *some* costs, not *all* of them.
I never said they were. That would be a dumb thing to say, because it would include things like no exceptions for the life of the mother, imposing the death penalty for women who have abortions, etc.
Yet you and Townie continue to claim -- incorrectly -- that you think abortion should be avoided at all costs.
I find this to be a very strange position. Not uncommon, of course, after Roe, but strange in its reasoning insofar as you are acknowledging that it is possible that a fetus is a human being/person/whatever but saying that it is only worthy of protection vis a vis the life of the mother once human science has progressed to the point it could be kept alive outside the womb. I find that to be an odd trigger date, considering (1) you acknowledge that what you think is okay to kill now should be protected in 150 years despite the fact it is no more or less a human being/person/whatever in 150 years and (2) the counterfactual that assumes the human being/person/whatever magically pops from inside the womb to outside of it without great burden on the mother.
I find this to be a very strange position. Not uncommon, of course, after Roe, but strange in its reasoning insofar as you are acknowledging that it is possible that a fetus is a human being/person/whatever but saying that it is only worthy of protection vis a vis the life of the mother once human science has progressed to the point it could be kept alive outside the womb. I find that to be an odd trigger date, considering (1) you acknowledge that what you think is okay to kill now should be protected in 150 years despite the fact it is no more or less a human being/person/whatever in 150 years and (2) the counterfactual that assumes the human being/person/whatever magically pops from inside the womb to outside of it without great burden on the mother.
Since human life trumps autonomy over one's body, should there be mandatory health insurance, enforced by sanctions imposed by the Internal Revenue Service.
Welcome to 2015.
Welcome to 2015.
Of all the valid criticisms of mandating health insurance, this is not one of them. Mandating health insurance does not in any way violate bodily autonomy.
Since human life trumps autonomy over one's body, should there be mandatory organ compatibility testing and forced organ donations? What about blood? Giving blood is less inconvenient than pregnancy.
I find that to be an odd trigger date, considering (1) you acknowledge that what you think is okay to kill now should be protected in 150 years despite the fact it is no more or less a human being/person/whatever in 150 years and .